login

Author Topic: Star Trek 3 with (without Spoooock) The Shat??  (Read 17870 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Darth Geek

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 28130
  • Liked: 5900
  • I am boring and destined to die alone!
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #30 on: September 26, 2014, 11:05:32 AM »
They've got a lot of talented actors in the roles. Willing to play them for years, and the audience loves them. The only problems with these movies (and that only some people have a problem with) is the writing and a little with the direction. You don't have to reboot the whole thing yet again in a few years to fix that.



Ben

  • Guest
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #31 on: September 26, 2014, 12:34:11 PM »
They've got a lot of talented actors in the roles. Willing to play them for years, and the audience loves them. The only problems with these movies (and that only some people have a problem with) is the writing and a little with the direction. You don't have to reboot the whole thing yet again in a few years to fix that.

Yup. If Paramount had followed the kind of logic popular in Hollywood today, they would have rebooted the franchise after the initial reaction to STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE, and one of the best ST movies ever made would never have existed.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 12:35:48 PM by Ben »


Offline Johnny Unusual

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 26232
  • Liked: 5185
  • Mr. Robot
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #32 on: September 26, 2014, 07:00:45 PM »
They've got a lot of talented actors in the roles. Willing to play them for years, and the audience loves them. The only problems with these movies (and that only some people have a problem with) is the writing and a little with the direction. You don't have to reboot the whole thing yet again in a few years to fix that.

Yup. If Paramount had followed the kind of logic popular in Hollywood today, they would have rebooted the franchise after the initial reaction to STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE, and one of the best ST movies ever made would never have existed.

The one where Michelle Nichols does a fan dance?


Soguru

  • Guest
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #33 on: September 26, 2014, 09:43:52 PM »
I completely disagree with you there.  Enterprise season 4 had some great episodes.  At least they try new things and different directions.  Unlike Orci/Kurtzman, in the 09 movie Nero is a bad copy of Shinzon and the movie is held together by improbable coincidences and STD is a bad rehash of of WoK.
And then Enterprise whizzed it right down their leg with "these are the voyages". I would say season 4 had some ok episodes but they're not remotely that great they're certainly not all that ambitious.  I think the whole season is still undone by the terrible cast and the characters. I just can't see how anybody can compare Nero with Shinzon other than being Romulans, I guess, they're just not the same character. Star Trek is for me about the characters and at least Star Trek 2009 and Star Trek into darkness gave us great stories for these characters and honestly I think that's what Star Trek is all about. it's all about the characters and how they feel together as family, dealing with life and death, and that's what's most important to me. The new movies as opposed to the TNG ones engross you on a genuinely organic level. With TNG movies and Enterprise I always got the sense that any emotional involvement was on a purely forced and artificial level.

Star Trek was an exciting space adventure showing us how the characters we already know had the requisite guts and cunning to save the universe. That's all I want out of a Star Trek movie, no more, no less. When you ask for too much intellectualism in a film you get something like Star Trek The Motion Picture and that's something nobody wants. I'm sure I don't need to remind you but(especially these days) studios will never go out on a limb purely for artistic reasons. Is that an excuse? Of course not. But I am more than happy to have something that breathes life into the characters I love and gives them exciting adventures to go on. I thought Star Trek 2009 was the perfect balance. Intellectualism is fine in the right context(2001 for instance), and it's much easier to stomach the thought of a script like Star Trek '09 versus 2001 a Space Odyssey. I am trying not to come off as an apologist but I'm afraid that's how I'm sounding right now.

Star Trek Into Darkness might arguably be a sloppy homage, but at least it was a decent homage. The actors as those characters made me believe it, whereas with anyone else directing it might have come off laughable. Star Trek Nemesis was completely sloppy in that it lacked vision, ambition, and all the elements that make a Star Trek movie totally exciting(Dune buggy chase anyone?). Nemesis really wanted you to believe it was 100% it's own original story. At least with Into Darkness, all the homages are clear and obvious, and I respect that. It doesn't try to hide what it is. Unlike Nemesis, I actually care about the Enterprise A crew and whether or not they live or die by the end. With Nemesis, I knew it was going to be the last movie and it moved so slow and it was so plodding and boring that I was like "Who cares?" upon the first viewing. Into Darkness even tackled subject matter that I thought was interesting. Just like The undiscovered country, it tackled the issue that in the future, fear and hatred will not be things of the past. As sad as it may seem, we'll always have that emotional baggage with us and we'll just need to learn to deal with it. I liked that message, and I thought it made for a wonderful conclusion because it was so deep and thought-provoking.

I think it's fair to say that each of the movies basically has what the other doesn't. The first one was a gripping, fast paced and exciting character oriented space adventure, and the second was an intense, thought-provoking drama, character-driven, science fiction think piece. 

After saying all this though, I have to consider the question: am I just so jaded I love those movies for the wrong reasons? Or do I just love them because there's something seriously wrong with me?
« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 10:22:38 PM by Soguru »


Offline MartyS (Gromit)

  • Not Quite Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11768
  • Liked: 2666
  • Weirdies!
    • My homepage
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #34 on: September 26, 2014, 11:52:38 PM »
They've got a lot of talented actors in the roles. Willing to play them for years, and the audience loves them. The only problems with these movies (and that only some people have a problem with) is the writing and a little with the direction. You don't have to reboot the whole thing yet again in a few years to fix that.

Yup. If Paramount had followed the kind of logic popular in Hollywood today, they would have rebooted the franchise after the initial reaction to STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE, and one of the best ST movies ever made would never have existed.

The one where Michelle Nichols does a fan dance?

You know, that one could have been good, a few changes here and there, better effects, more realistic comic relief, better science (the center of the galaxy? come on...).  It was pretty much ruined by going with a cheap special effects company and the studio wanting it to be "more funny like the one with the whales"....  ::)

It's too bad the TNG crew only had one good movie (First Contact), besides the terrible scripts the cast seemed to loose some of the chemistry they had on the show, maybe the TOS crew got it together faster because they had been away from each other longer?  Of course they also had far better stories to work with.

I seem to have blocked out Nemesis nearly completely now, last time I watched it was the week it came out on DVD, Insurrection I may have watched 3 times, same with Generations, First Contact is the only one I've upgraded to Blu-Ray.

Not sure why so many people hate the cast of Enterprise, I really liked two thirds of them, the rest were average.

No matter what Braga and Berman say, These Are The Voyages was a big FU to the fans, the end where we don't get to hear Archers' speech just proves it.  "A valentine to trek" my ass....


Ben

  • Guest
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #35 on: September 27, 2014, 06:14:16 AM »
The one where Michelle Nichols does a fan dance?

Ooooh, good one! You know what would have made that scene even better? LENS FLARES!

(And you know I was talking about WRATH OF KHAN, smarty-pants.)
« Last Edit: September 27, 2014, 06:15:58 AM by Ben »


Offline Johnny Unusual

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 26232
  • Liked: 5185
  • Mr. Robot
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #36 on: September 27, 2014, 02:19:49 PM »
They've got a lot of talented actors in the roles. Willing to play them for years, and the audience loves them. The only problems with these movies (and that only some people have a problem with) is the writing and a little with the direction. You don't have to reboot the whole thing yet again in a few years to fix that.

Yup. If Paramount had followed the kind of logic popular in Hollywood today, they would have rebooted the franchise after the initial reaction to STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE, and one of the best ST movies ever made would never have existed.

The one where Michelle Nichols does a fan dance?

You know, that one could have been good, a few changes here and there, better effects, more realistic comic relief, better science (the center of the galaxy? come on...).  It was pretty much ruined by going with a cheap special effects company and the studio wanting it to be "more funny like the one with the whales"....  ::)

It's too bad the TNG crew only had one good movie (First Contact), besides the terrible scripts the cast seemed to loose some of the chemistry they had on the show, maybe the TOS crew got it together faster because they had been away from each other longer?  Of course they also had far better stories to work with.

I seem to have blocked out Nemesis nearly completely now, last time I watched it was the week it came out on DVD, Insurrection I may have watched 3 times, same with Generations, First Contact is the only one I've upgraded to Blu-Ray.

Not sure why so many people hate the cast of Enterprise, I really liked two thirds of them, the rest were average.

No matter what Braga and Berman say, These Are The Voyages was a big FU to the fans, the end where we don't get to hear Archers' speech just proves it.  "A valentine to trek" my ass....

Legend goes that the plot was based on a sardonic comment from Harlan Ellison.  The producers wanted a story bur after every pitch they demanded he go bigger.  Harlan gets fed up and says "OK, they go to the edge of space and meet God."  And that's what they go with (surprising that he would take that meeting considering he was still upset about the whole "City on the Edge of Forever" thing.


Offline Sideswipe

  • Compsognathus
  • *****
  • Posts: 10563
  • Liked: 2052
  • Look at me!!
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #37 on: September 27, 2014, 02:47:24 PM »
I havent heard that about Harlan Ellison.  Ive heard Gene Roddenberry wanted the Enterprise crew to meet god.  The Star Trek V story was pretty much all on Shatner.  Not sure what Ellison has to be upset about over "City on the Edge of Forever"  I think it was Leonard Nimoy who wrote that Ellison turned in a script that was virtually unfilmable on a tv budget and had to be almost completely re-written but he still got paid for it and credit for writing it.

I was bieng threated with death by wolf raping before it was cool!.


Offline RVR II

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 54373
  • Liked: 3899
  • There can be Only 1...
    • RVR II's YouTube Channel
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #38 on: September 27, 2014, 03:13:13 PM »
Quote
William Shatner Confirms He Was Contacted About Star Trek 3 And He Would Love To Do It 0

09/27/2014     

Despite tweeting out a denial that anybody had contacted him about Star Trek 3, William Shatner confirmed today that he had indeed been contacted about Star Trek 3 by none other than J.J. Abrams. However, Abrams asked him to keep it a secret, so he hadn’t initially said anything about it.

This weekend, Shatner has been appearing at the Wizard World Nashville Comic Con, which Comicbook.com is covering live.

Shatner said that while he was visiting Australia a couple weeks ago, J.J. Abrams called him from London, where he’s currently shooting Star Wars Episode VII. Shatner said Abrams told him, “I’m calling because the director of Star Trek, the next movie, has had an idea where you might be involved, so I’m calling to find out whether you would be interested.”

Shatner said he told Abrams, “It depends on what you do with the character, but I would be delighted.”

Shatner said that Abrams warned him that he couldn’t say anything to anybody, and Shatner agreed not to even tell his wife.

However, when Shatner got back from Australia, he said, “It’s all over the Internet that the director had held an interview and said they want Shatner and Nimoy to be in the next movie. I’ll bet you J.J.’s frothing at the mouth at this point. So the news is out that they have an idea that they want Leonard and myself…they might want Leonard and myself in it. But I would love to do it. But how do you get me fifty years later into the movie? I mean how do you rationalize it. I know it’s science fiction, but even I couldn’t come up with an idea. So that’s the news on that.”


Soguru

  • Guest
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #39 on: September 27, 2014, 03:16:13 PM »
I havent heard that about Harlan Ellison.  Ive heard Gene Roddenberry wanted the Enterprise crew to meet god.  The Star Trek V story was pretty much all on Shatner.  Not sure what Ellison has to be upset about over "City on the Edge of Forever"  I think it was Leonard Nimoy who wrote that Ellison turned in a script that was virtually unfilmable on a tv budget and had to be almost completely re-written but he still got paid for it and credit for writing it.
as I recall Roddenberry said something like "I tried to do a God story and it didn't work". he was opposed to the appearance of God in the film and even more opposed to the appearance of God in familiar Western form. Shatner just kept insisting it would work, it would work. Obviously it didn't. originally in the late 70s Roddenberry's idea was actually a story that was about God and that eventually did end up becoming Star Trek the motion picture. Roddenberrys original concept would have been about how man can pursue his course in history without any need of Gods, able to account for his own behavior without the religiously imposed concepts of fear or divine intervention. at the end of his original draft the crew of the enterprise ended up destroying Jesus Christ and his spaceship, and that's probably not exactly how he had it going but its the most hilarious way I can think of to phrase it.


Offline Sideswipe

  • Compsognathus
  • *****
  • Posts: 10563
  • Liked: 2052
  • Look at me!!
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #40 on: September 27, 2014, 03:35:52 PM »
Id love to see Worf and Jesus dueling with bat'leths.   

I was bieng threated with death by wolf raping before it was cool!.


Offline MartyS (Gromit)

  • Not Quite Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11768
  • Liked: 2666
  • Weirdies!
    • My homepage
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #41 on: September 27, 2014, 03:47:29 PM »
Id love to see Worf and Jesus dueling with bat'leths.

You know it would just turn out to be a Jesus clone.  Then a long debate about "does it matter HOW he returned?"....


Offline Toyland Chairman

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 724
  • Liked: 78
    • Toyland: The First DEMONIC TOYS Homepage
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #42 on: September 27, 2014, 04:12:39 PM »
I can understand Shatner being in this somehow, seeing is this timeline's Kirk probably won't die the same way Shatner's did. But why bother? Nimoy was pretty much shoehorned into the last movie. I don't think Shatner likes cameos either, and it's not necessary to make his older Kirk have any real importance to the plot.
For DEMONIC TOYS and updates on Full Moon Films:
www.freewebs.com/demonictoys/


Offline Sideswipe

  • Compsognathus
  • *****
  • Posts: 10563
  • Liked: 2052
  • Look at me!!
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #43 on: September 27, 2014, 04:20:06 PM »
Good question...

I was bieng threated with death by wolf raping before it was cool!.


Soguru

  • Guest
Re: Star Trek 3 with Spoooock and The Shat??
« Reply #44 on: September 27, 2014, 09:35:13 PM »
It was Star Trek the Motion Picture that got Gene Roddenberry reduced to "executive consultant". He wasn't happy with anything about Star Trek 2. He would just keep sending memos to Harve Bennett probably saying things like "Riding with Death sucked" or something. It's even been written that Roddenberry was the one who leaked that Spock was going to die in Star Trek 2. Throughout the 80's he kept pushing his Time Travel script which featured the Enterprise crew meeting with JFK and Spock killing him. Maybe there could be a cameo with Magneto trying to save JFK if 20th Century Fox would be willing to hand over limited rights to the character.